scholarly journals Radiation Exposure during Fluoroscopic Assistance for Pedicle Screw Insertion during Instrumented Spine Surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. s-0035-1554581-s-0035-1554581
Author(s):  
José Vicente Ballesteros Plaza ◽  
Ratko Jovan Yurac Barrientos ◽  
Enrique Andrés Viveros Pereira
Neurosurgery ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 710-711
Author(s):  
Kevin Foley ◽  
Y. Raja Rampersaud ◽  
Alfred C. Shen ◽  
Scott Williams ◽  
Milo Solomito

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 5960-5968 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Fan ◽  
Jinpeng Du ◽  
Jianan Zhang ◽  
Shichang Liu ◽  
Xukai Xue ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Kumar ◽  
Vishnu Baburaj ◽  
Prasoon Kumar ◽  
Sarvdeep Singh Dhatt

AbstractBackgroundPedicle screw insertion is routinely carried out in spine surgery that has traditionally been performed under fluoroscopy guidance. Robotic guidance has recently gained popularity in order to improve the accuracy of screw placement. However, it is unclear whether the use of robotics alters the accuracy of screw placement or clinical outcomes.ObjectivesThis systematic review aims to compare the results of pedicle screws inserted under fluoroscopy guidance, with those inserted under robotic guidance, in terms of both short-term radiographic outcomes, as well as long-term clinical outcomes.MethodsThis systematic review will be conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search will be conducted on the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Ovid with a pre-determined search strategy. A manual bibliography search of included studies will also be done. Original articles in English that directly compare pedicle screw insertion under robotic guidance to those inserted under fluoroscopy guidance will be included. Data on outcomes will be extracted from included studies and analysis carried out with the help of appropriate software.


2020 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 350-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nhu Q. Nguyen ◽  
Stefano M. Priola ◽  
Joel M. Ramjist ◽  
Daipayan Guha ◽  
Yuta Dobashi ◽  
...  

Spine ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (20) ◽  
pp. 2637-2645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Raja Rampersaud ◽  
Kevin T. Foley ◽  
Alfred C. Shen ◽  
Scott Williams ◽  
Milo Solomito

Author(s):  
José Miguel Spirig ◽  
Shayan Golshani ◽  
Nadja A. Farshad-Amacker ◽  
Mazda Farshad

OBJECTIVE Patient-specific template-guided (TG) pedicle screw placement currently achieves the highest reported accuracy in cadaveric and early clinical studies, with reports of reduced use of radiation and less surgical time. However, a clinical randomized controlled trial (RCT) eliminating potential biases is lacking. This study compares TG and standard freehand (FH) pedicle screw insertion techniques in an RCT. METHODS Twenty-four patients (mean age 64 years, 9 men and 15 women) scheduled consecutively and independently from this study for 1-, 2-, or 3-level lumbar fusion were randomized to either the FH (n = 12) or TG (n = 12) group. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement, intraoperative parameters, and short-term complications were compared. RESULTS A total of 112 screws (58 FH and 54 TG screws) were implanted in the lumbar spine. Radiation exposure was significantly less in the TG group (78.0 ± 46.3 cGycm2) compared with the FH group (234.1 ± 138.1 cGycm2, p = 0.001). There were 4 pedicle screw perforations (6.9%) in the FH group and 2 (3.7%) in the TG group (p > 0.99), with no clinical consequences. Clinically relevant complications were 1 postoperative pedicle fracture in the FH group (p > 0.99), 1 infection in the FH group, and 2 infections in the TG group (p > 0.99). There were no significant differences in surgical exposure time, screw insertion time, overall surgical time, or blood loss between the FH and TG groups. CONCLUSIONS In this RCT, patient-specific TG pedicle screw insertion in the lumbar region achieved a high accuracy, but not better than a standardized FH technique. Even if intraoperative radiation exposure is less with the TG technique, the need for a preoperative CT scan counterbalances this advantage. However, more difficult trajectories might reveal potential benefits of the TG technique and need further research.


Spine ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 1538-1541 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P. Gwynne Jones ◽  
Peter A. Robertson ◽  
Brian Lunt ◽  
Med Phys ◽  
Suzanne A. Jackson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document